Buhrmann & Partners Consulting Engineers v Garbade (2) (25 of 2012) [2015] NASC 22 (27 October 2015)

Buhrmann & Partners Consulting Engineers v Garbade (2) (25 of 2012) [2015] NASC 22 (27 October 2015)

The evidence and commercial context overwhelmingly indicate that Mr Garbade contracted in his personal capacity, not as a representative of Jary Enterprises. The special plea of misjoinder was not proven and should be dismissed.

Citation
[2015] NASC 22
Parties
Appellant: Buhrmann & Partners Consulting Engineers; Respondent: Günther Wilfried Garbade
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
27 October 2015
Case Number
25 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal upheld
Legal Topics
Capacity to Contract, Misjoinder, Special Plea, Estoppel
Source Language
English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Capacity to Contract Misjoinder Special Plea Estoppel

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Buhrmann & Partners Consulting Engineers

Appellant

Günther Wilfried Garbade

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Garbade contracted in his personal or representative capacity
  2. 2 Whether the special plea of misjoinder should be upheld

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence and commercial context overwhelmingly indicate that Mr Garbade contracted in his personal capacity, not as a representative of Jary Enterprises. The special plea of misjoinder was not proven and should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal upheld

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including costs of one instructing and one instructed counsel.
  • The High Court order upholding the special plea is set aside and substituted with an order dismissing the special plea with costs.